Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019 Nov;71:1140-1146. doi: 10.1007/s12070-018-01571-0. Epub 2019 Jan 03.

Ossiculoplasty: A Prospective Study on 50 Patients Using Various Graft Materials.

Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India

Ghatdeep K Lamba, Barjinder Singh Sohal, Jagdish Prasad Goyal

PMID: 31750139 PMCID: PMC6841910 DOI: 10.1007/s12070-018-01571-0

Abstract

With large number of grafts available for ossiculoplasty, choice becomes difficult. An ideal graft should be safe, easily available, cost efficient, with good hearing results, uptake and low extrusion rates. The ear nose and throat surgeon is still facing the indecision over type of graft to be selected. A prospective study was conducted in Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Rajindra Hospital, Patiala (August 2012-2014) on 50 patients 15-60 years, of either sex with ABG > 40 dB. Operative procedure planned and type of graft decided intraoperatively. Autografts included remodelled malleus, remodelled incus and tragal cartilage grafts. Synthetic (Teflon) grafts were PORP and TORP. Graft uptake/failure was noted at 1 and 3 months. PTA done at 3 months postoperatively. Net hearing gain (change in ABG) was calculated for various grafts used and analysed. Mean age was 35.26 ± 13 yrs, male and female 1:1. Most common involved ossicle was incus (100%) followed by stapes (36%) and malleus (34%). Autografts, 23, uptake in 20 (86.95%), failure 3 (13.04%) cases. Synthetic grafts, 27, uptake 18 (66.66%) and failure 9 (33.33%). 'p'value 0.09 (non significant). Mean hearing gain, autografts 14.47 ± 6.54 dB and synthetic grafts 14.57 ± 13.12 dB. 'p' value 0.976 (non significant). No significant difference seen in mean hearing gain and uptake/failure of autografts and synthetic grafts. Autografts being cost effective are preferred choice.

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2019.

Keywords: Autografts; Hearing; Ossiculoplasty; Synthetic grafts

References

1. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Oct;272(10):2713-8 - PubMed
2. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2012 Oct;32(5):309-13 - PubMed
3. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012 Mar;64(1):36-41 - PubMed
4. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012 Dec;64(4):374-6 - PubMed
5. Ann Ib Postgrad Med. 2008 Dec;6(2):31-3 - PubMed
6. Ann Saudi Med. 2004 Nov-Dec;24(6):442-7 - PubMed
7. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005 Aug;133(2):295-7 - PubMed
8. J Pak Med Assoc. 1994 Oct;44(10):235-7 - PubMed
9. Laryngoscope. 1989 Sep;99(9):955-62 - PubMed
10. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Jan;270(1):69-76 - PubMed
11. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Oct;62(4):421-6 - PubMed
12. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2007 Mar;116(3):181-91 - PubMed
13. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1996 Oct;21(5):404-8 - PubMed
14. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Feb;8(2):59-61 - PubMed
15. Med J Malaysia. 1995 Sep;50(3):233-6 - PubMed
16. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012 Mar;64(1):5-12 - PubMed
17. Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi. 2004 Sep;18(9):547-8 - PubMed
18. N Am J Med Sci. 2013 Apr;5(4):282-7 - PubMed
19. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac. 2001 Sep;118(4):225-31 - PubMed
20. Ann Trop Paediatr. 2007 Dec;27(4):291-6 - PubMed
21. Clin Med Insights Ear Nose Throat. 2013 Jul 23;6:21-8 - PubMed
22. Surg Radiol Anat. 2008 May;30(3):221-7 - PubMed
23. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2014 Oct;33(10):1010-5 - PubMed
24. Laryngorhinootologie. 2009 May;88 Suppl 1:S32-47 - PubMed
25. Otol Neurotol. 2001 Jul;22(4):451-6 - PubMed
26. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012 Dec;64(4):377-81 - PubMed
27. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1994 Aug;27(4):689-715 - PubMed
28. J Laryngol Otol. 2008 May;122(5):442-6 - PubMed
29. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2014 Jul;26(76):143-50 - PubMed

Publication Types

• Journal Article